Chronicle/Woman in Black

"It's a short movie.  It's less than an hour and 30 minutes"
"Well, some movies are better shorter than long and drawn out.  Take Breaking Dawn for example, it should have been only 30 minutes."
And as my brother and I discovered, an hour and 23 minutes was the perfect amount of time for Chronicle.  Later I discovered that an hour and 35 minutes was also the perfect amount of time for Woman in Black.  It was refreshing sitting through a short and sweet movie---even though both Chronicle and Woman in Black were far from being "sweet" films.  Of course, not every movie should be short.  I fully expect my butt to be numb after I watch The Hobbit---each minute of that movie is bound to be glorious and well deserved.

Cameron loved Chronicle.  When we left the theater he raved and raved about it--long enough for me to realize that he was not being sarcastic.  Not that I thought it was horrible---I just didn't think it was fantastic.  I had low expectations for it to begin with and while it exceeded my expectations it's still not a movie that was remarkable or something I would watch again.

The movie centers abound three--high school? college?--kids who find a stone type thing that gives them telepathic abilities.  As almost anyone will tell you--not everyone should be granted with powers.  Because one emo kid will ruin the fun for everybody.  You easily sympathize with Andrew, the abused, poor, misfit, emo kid.   But  you also enjoy the other two confident, easily popular kids as well.  It's extremely well done.  The effects are well done.  It's just a little to predictable for me.  But it as fun movie to watch.


I had to drag myself to go see Woman in Black. In fact is Ashley hadn't been persistent I probably would never have gone to see it.  Not that it looked bad--I just don't handle scary movies well.  This episode from Boy Meets World still freaks me out:

Well, to be honest, I can't give the best review of the movie considering I spent a considerable amount of time with my eyes closed, fingers in my ears.  Or doubled over in my seat so I couldn't see the screen.  Or with my hands over my face, leaving a small enough gap in between my fingers to see Daniel Radcliffe's face.  But from what I did see, I thought it was well done.  It's not revolutionary but it's a scary movie with secretive British people and a freaky marsh. 

Daniel Radcliffe's character has to travel to this town to got through the paperwork in an old house---in the middle of a marsh.  Conveniently, you're stranded at the house often because when the tide comes in on the marsh and the road is in accessible.  Perfect setting for scary crap to happen.  So many warning signs for his character to get the heck out of dodge.  The people in the village want him gone, the house is in the middle of a marsh causing you to be stuck at the marsh except when the tide is low, and the house looks like this:

Um. Yeah.  I would never have even stepped foot in that house.  But he does....because he's Harry Freaking Potter (you're a legend man to us all---oh AVPS).

It was great seeing Daniel Radcliffe in a different on screen role and he did great.  All in all it was a jumpy, scary movie that will keep your heart racing.